Contrastive Analysis

A Presentation by Lulud, Nicko, and Novian

Contrastive Analysis: The Definition

CA is SLA approach that compares

features of L1 and L2 in order to
determine the similarities and differences
of L1 to L2
Continued…

The idea of CA was popular back in the time

when structural linguistics (structuralism) and
behavioral psychology (behaviorism) were
dominant (Yang, 1992).
We’ll talk about this later on…
CA: The Transfer

In Contrastive Analysis, when students of L1

learn L2, there are two kinds of transfer
happening:
Negative Transfer
Positive Transfer
Positive Transfer

refers to the similarity found in both L1 in L2;

be it in the grammatical structure,
morphology, or pronunciation.
These similarities are believed to ease the
students in learning the L2
Negative Transfer

refers to the differences of grammatical

structure, morphology, and pronunciation of
the L2 compared to the L1.
The negative transfer is said to be the
obstacle of the students in learning L2
When do these transfer occur?

In the context of Indonesian students learning

English, both positive transfer and negative
transfer will occur in the process of learning
such as in the learning of grammar,
morphology, and pronunciation.
Positive
“Saya makan” and “I
Transfer eat”
“Pembunuh” and
• Grammar “Murderer”
• Morphology Car [kar] (English), and
/k/amu, /a/dik, and
• Phonology /r/api (Indonesian)
 There
There is
arenomany
verb in
Tensed-sentence
base form, singular-
phonemes that do
subject-present
“I ate” can easily be
The Negative not
form,exist
past
translated
(Indonesia)
participle
in form,
L1
as past
“saya
form, and
makan” dopping or
Transfer present
ignoringparticiple
the tense
form in Indonesian
information

• Grammar
• Morphology
• Phonology
However

 though those three aspects of language can experience both

positive and negative transfer, the focus of CA is on the surface
forms of both L1 and L2 systems.
 It also focuses on describing and comparing the languages one
level at a time – generally by contrasting the phonology of L1 and
L2 first, then morphology, then syntax, with the lexicon receiving
relatively little attention, and discourse still less
Implication in ELT

CA only provides WHAT to teach

ALM provides HOW to teach
 Why Structuralism
CA  Comparing L1 & L2
ALM? structures
ALM  Teaching the new
It shares the same structures
theories as the
basis Behaviorism
CA  Language acquisition
Its principles essentially involves habit
related to formation
Contrastive
Analysis ALM  Strengthen habit through
drills
Related ALM principles with CA

Language is speech, not writing

Language is a set of habits
Teach the language not about the language
Languages are different
Pros and Cons in CA

experience
research
theory
Pros argumentations in CA

Klein (1986: 26) stated that “the existence of various

forms of transfer is too obvious to be ignored”.
Rivers and Temperley (1978: 152) also assume that CA
is also still good to analyze the students’ problem
Lehn and Slager (1959) compared the L1 and L2 in
the process of transfering.
 Table about the difficulties/problems

Native Language Learner Problems Examples:

Arabic speakers learn English /b/ Habit
Arabic speakers learn English /v/ have it
Indonesian speakers learn English /g/ to /k/ Leg
Indonesian speakers learn English /d/ to /t/ Bird
Indonesian speakers learn English /b/ to /p/ Cap
Indonesian speakers learn English More than two Girls
consonants
Cons argumentations in CA

Hughes (1980) attributes the reasons for CA’ loss

popularity to each lack of success in predicting
difficulties. He also argues that CA has undervalued
the contribution of the learners and also failed to
recognize what has to be learnt.
Cons argumentations in CA

Wardhaugh (1970: 125) believes that the strong

version of CA was quite unrealistic and
impracticable.
Lances (1969) reports that one-third to two-third of
his adult foreign students English’ errors were not
traceable to the first language.
 Cons argumentations in CA

 James (1985) also made some counter arguments that:

Interference from the L1 is not the sole source of error in L2
learning.
The predictions of students’ error in L2 made by CA are not
reliable.
 CA is based on, and perpetuates, a naïve view of language
structure.
There is not establishing criteria fir comparability.
CA only conceives of interference in one direction, from L1 to L2.
Thank You